The ABC’s amateur-hour media conspiracy theory

The ABC has a new TV ad campaign in which an academic, Bec, gushes about the diversity of views on campus, yet in the next breath she claims that her students, without exception, rate the public broadcaster as trustworthy. It speaks volumes that nobody at the ABC spotted the contradiction. At its best, the ABC is a reliable news source and cultural trove that links audiences in far-flung regions with those in our big cities. But the ABC has not performed consistently at its best for decades.

On Tuesday night the ABC’s prime-time news bulletin told the nation that two prominent Australians — Seven West Media chairman Kerry Stokes and Rupert Murdoch, executive chairman of News Corp, the publisher of this newspaper — were caught up in a conspiracy to force Malcolm Turnbull from power. Such a claim should have rung editorial alarm bells at the outset. It’s too convenient a narrative for Mr Turnbull and his supporters. They wilfully misread as betrayal our consistent message in editorials that the government had to sharpen its political skills if it hoped to prosecute its reforms and win back the electorate. Tony Abbott also proved adept at misconstruing well-meaning advice as sabotage. We did not campaign for Mr Abbott’s removal, nor for Mr Turnbull’s. In each case a flawed leader has refused to acknowledge that he helped bring himself undone. We was robbed, they cry.

Another reason for journalistic caution in the ABC’s Ultimo bunker should be familiar to even the most callow reporter. If an explosive claim rests on a private conversation involving two people (Mr Stokes and Mr Murdoch), the story is no more than gossip unless at least one of the pair goes on the record or the reporter obtains a copy or transcript of the exchange. ABC political editor Andrew Probyn presented neither, yet the news package put to air included a mock-up of a supposed text between Mr Murdoch and Mr Stokes. And so the ABC left itself exposed. The next day Mr Stokes broke his customary silence to issue a flat denial that any such conversation, let alone a conspiracy, took place. Yet the ABC failed to mention the Stokes reply on Wednesday’s 7pm news.

It’s not Probyn’s first error of judgment but the problem at the ABC is institutional. Where is the evidence of grown-up editorial vetting? The decline in standards has continued under managing director Michelle Guthrie. Just as the shift to an uncompelling
24-hour news channel came at the expense of depth in news and current affairs, a recent foray into commercial lifestyle content takes the ABC further away from its role as a “market failure broadcaster” of excellence. A symptom of the malaise was the disingenuous response of ABC spokeswoman Sally Jackson when this newspaper asked if the Probyn piece satisfied editorial guidelines: “Can you please specify what are the editorial guidelines you suggest have not been followed,” she asked. We found them easily on the home page: “The ABC has a statutory duty to ensure that the gathering and presentation of news and information is accurate according to the recognised standards of objective journalism. Credibility depends heavily on factual accuracy.” So much for credibility.